LOT AND HIS TWO DAUGHTERS

[warrior12]

Genesis 19King James Version (KJV)

⁸ Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

Lot, Abraham nephew.  I have heard numerous sermons and read articles condemning Lot in the most vilifying  and humiliating ways as to the scripture verse above.  

My question.  What do you think ?.  Was Lot a man who willing wanted to give up  his daughters up to be gang raped by the sodomites to protect two strangers he did not know or was he trying to just ease the tensions, calm things down and let his guest be unharmed.    Or do you have a different view of how you may interpret what took place there. ? 

[Churchmouse]

2 minutes ago, warrior12 said:

Genesis 19King James Version (KJV)

⁸ Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

Lot, Abraham nephew.  I have heard numerous sermons and written articles condemning Lot in the most vilifying  and humiliating ways as to the scripture verse above.  

My question.  What do you think ?.  Was Lot a man who willing wanted to give up  his daughters up to be gang raped by the sodomites to protect two strangers he did not know or was he trying to just ease the tensions, calm things down and let his guest be unharmed.    Or do you have a different view of how you may interpret what took place there. ? 

Does anyone know for sure wither the culture at that time valued men over women and is it fair for those who attack Lot because of today's standards?

[warrior12]

1 minute ago, Churchmouse said:

Does anyone know for sure wither the culture at that time valued men over women and is it fair for those who attack Lot because of today's standards?

Good point, but we are talking about a man offspring, who he must have held close to his heart, though in life we know that is not always the case.  I mean his flesh and blood for strangers, I think that ticks of readers of this story  the most.

[warrior12]

5 minutes ago, Yowm said:

If I recall correctly, the Middle Eastern culture highly valued guests and would bend over backwards to protect any guests one may have.

Though that may have been the trend, parenting instincts kicks in when coming to offsprings  as we see in the animal kingdom i would think. 

 

Proverbs 17King James Version (KJV)

¹² Let a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man, rather than a fool in his folly.

[warrior12]

7 minutes ago, Yowm said:

The Patriarch's weren't animals and it was not a trend, it was a deeply embedded custom. Actually it is the same in most cultures except the West.

I certainly is not suggesting that the Patriarch's were animals.  Just drawing the reference to show that if animals protect their offspring so much, then man naturally has those instincts and human moral values too.    Yes, different cultures has their customs to treat their guest with respect ect, but not let abuse to that extent.   Also, the Bible does say, Lot was a righteous man.

2 Peter 2King James Version (KJV)

⁷ And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

⁸ (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)

[Openly Curious]

2 hours ago, warrior12 said:

Genesis 19King James Version (KJV)

⁸ Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

Lot, Abraham nephew.  I have heard numerous sermons and read articles condemning Lot in the most vilifying  and humiliating ways as to the scripture verse above.  

My question.  What do you think ?.  Was Lot a man who willing wanted to give up  his daughters up to be gang raped by the sodomites to protect two strangers he did not know or was he trying to just ease the tensions, calm things down and let his guest be unharmed.    Or do you have a different view of how you may interpret what took place there. ? 

The the two strangers that Lot was protecting were actually angels of God that had been sent to the city.  It was better in the eyes of God that a natural relationship would take place between Lot's daughter's and the men, than for an unatural relationship to take place between the angels of God and the men.  Remember Genesis 6.  The men wanted to literally abuse the angels of God all that night but Lot protected them from that unholy union.  

[Churchmouse]

5 hours ago, warrior12 said:

Good point, but we are talking about a man offspring, who he must have held close to his heart, though in life we know that is not always the case.  I mean his flesh and blood for strangers, I think that ticks of readers of this story  the most.

I am thinking along the lines of family honor and the idea that if Lot had sons wouldn't they take up arms to defend these guests ad if so, why wouldn't he use his own daughters to keep the same honor. I mean, I really do think that people back then were highly Patriarchal and used women as pretty much a means of growing political ties. They were married to ties families to families and still the father had to give the daughter a dowry, just to make her more appealing to her suitor.

Just remember what Jacob had to do to gain Rachel. She was more a reward for services rendered than something prized by her father and in the end her father gave her older sister to Jacob out of what her father called family honor, but I think it was more out of greed.

I'm thinking daughters were just accepted out of hand to be a means to and end and I think Lot offered up his daughters to bring a situation he could not control to an end.

[Churchmouse]

4 hours ago, warrior12 said:

I certainly is not suggesting that the Patriarch's were animals.  Just drawing the reference to show that if animals protect their offspring so much, then man naturally has those instincts and human moral values too.    Yes, different cultures has their customs to treat their guest with respect ect, but not let abuse to that extent.   Also, the Bible does say, Lot was a righteous man.

2 Peter 2King James Version (KJV)

⁷ And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

⁸ (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)

Animals do things out of instinct which is a thing of reaction and not of purpose. We are talking about people who live in a time where certain social norms and ideals are expected.  Certainly Lot walked with God, but he also had culture to deal with and it is the standards of the day that Lot had to adhere to in being apart of the society he was living in and that included being strong enough to defend guests in his hoe. He did that as best he could with what he had to deal with and he tried to bargain his daughters for that honor.

I would infer from the fact that God allowed Lot to leave and get far enough away from the city to survive that he had something going for him. If I remember right Abraham tried to barging with God to save the cities and that was all about the number of righteous people within the city. If I were to put these two incidents together, I would have no problem coming to the conclusion that Lot was indeed a righteous man.

[other one]

5 hours ago, Openly Curious said:

The the two strangers that Lot was protecting were actually angels of God that had been sent to the city.  It was better in the eyes of God that a natural relationship would take place between Lot's daughter's and the men, than for an unatural relationship to take place between the angels of God and the men.  Remember Genesis 6.  The men wanted to literally abuse the angels of God all that night but Lot protected them from that unholy union.  

I believe it was the angels that protected themselves that day.

 

[HisFirst]

8 hours ago, Churchmouse said:

Does anyone know for sure wither the culture at that time valued men over women and is it fair for those who attack Lot because of today's standards?

Could it be also a reaction on Lots part after many years of living in a depraved society and having part of that mindset and "culture"  rubbing off on him ?  Hence the offering his daughters to the men and also the episode later with the daughters' decision about bearing children (sired by Lot).

Edited January 18, 2017 by HisFirst